2020
DOI: 10.1002/app.49220
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Using viscoelastic modeling and molecular dynamics based simulations to characterize polymer natural fiber composites

Abstract: The potential for polymer natural fiber composites for manufacturing storage units for products with high ethanol content is explored. The influence of ethanol diffusion into the microstructure of the storage unit on its long‐term mechanical (specifically creep compliance) and viscoelastic properties are measured. Burger's model for polymer viscoelasticity is used to predict durability and other fundamental properties of the composite based on the creep compliance trends. Properties such as the Maxwell moduli … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
16
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

1
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 49 publications
1
16
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In our previous work [29], the Burger model was used to provide the fit to the compliance data. Burger's model, shown 2) and Fig.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…In our previous work [29], the Burger model was used to provide the fit to the compliance data. Burger's model, shown 2) and Fig.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, fitting a viscoelastic model (the Burger's model detailed in [29]) and determining critical structural parameters such as the equilibrium modulus, Kelvin Voigt modulus, Kelvin Voigt viscosity and relaxation time as a function of dispersed phase and ethanol uptake is conducted. This can then be compared and contrasted with the trends in Maxwell moduli and viscosities indicated in [29]. 3.…”
Section: Composite Systemmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Compared with the experimental values, PCFF and SciPCFF under-predicted the density by approximately 5% and 2%, respectively. This difference in simulated density by these two force fields is explained by the coefficient variations used in defining the energy functions, indicating the possible best fit in SciPCFF terms used to predict the density of the polymeric systems 56 .…”
Section: A Steady-state Density Analysis Of the Monomer Modelmentioning
confidence: 98%